[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#665795: texlive-base upgrade leaves empty directories behind



clone 665795 -1
reassign -1 dpkg
retitle -1 dpkg-maintscript-helper does not remove empty directories
thanks

On Mo, 26 Mär 2012, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> During the upgrade from 2009-15, dpkg is complaining about:
> 
> Dépaquetage de la mise à jour de texlive-base ...
> Remplacement de fichiers dans l'ancien paquet tex-common ...
> dpkg : avertissement : impossible de supprimer l'ancien répertoire « /etc/texmf/metafont/misc » : Le dossier n'est pas vide
> dpkg : avertissement : impossible de supprimer l'ancien répertoire « /etc/texmf/metafont » : Le dossier n'est pas vide
> dpkg : avertissement : impossible de supprimer l'ancien répertoire « /etc/texmf/texdoc » : Le dossier n'est pas vide
> 
> After all the packages have been confiured /etc/texmf/metafont and
> /etc/texmf/texdoc are empty and not owned by any packages.

I see, that is true, and there are more directories like that.

It comes from the fact that I assumed that using dpkg-maintscript-helper
will remove empty directories, too, which it doesn't.

I am cloning this bug and reassiǵn to dpkg so that this might get
implemented.

dpkg maintainers: After removing a conffile it might be useful to add
	rmdir --ignore-if-empty $(basename $file)
or whatever you are using.

For the TeX Live packages, this is a problem now, because I really
don't know how to autogenreate it. I will look into it.

Best wishes

Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining            preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan                                 TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOBSTER (n.)
A strain of perfectly healthy rodent which develops cancer the moment
it enter a laboratory.
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff



Reply to: